Ought Doesn’t Mean Should or Must
Editor, Times-Dispatch: Tyler Whitely's news story, "Byrne: 'A Step Backward' for Virginia," on the absence of female representation in Virginia's congressional delegation is telling, but what does it tell us?It tells us that former Rep. Leslie L. Byrne of Fairfax apparently does not believe in the electoral process. Instead she apparently thinks the ought philosophy is a desirable replacement to ensure that "women . . . have more representation."
Assuming women voters mirror the general population, Byrne's comments ignore the fact that women are the majority of voters in Virginia. As such, should they decide that "ought" is a valuable criterion, they have the power to make "ought" a reality. However, women, much to their credit, looked at the candidates and decided that the women candidates, for whatever reason, were less desirable than the male opponents and voted accordingly.
The ought philosophy is not new nor is it confined to the example above. How many times have the words, "There ought to be a law," been spoken or heard?
Courtney Ryan. Midlothian.
Many City Ordinances Are Long Neglected
Editor, Times-Dispatch:
Mayor Dwight C. Jones' editorial statement of intent, published inThe Times-Dispatch on Dec. 30, suggests that his energies would be far more useful as Richmond's superintendent of schools than as mayor.
There is little provision in law for the two officers to meddle in one another's affairs. However, neglected ordinances pertinent to the office also did not detract from Mayor Jones' predecessors: Robert Bobb, Calvin Jamison, and Douglas Wilder. Each pursued his respective agenda with tribal imperative while citizens languished for basic municipal services.
As Jones pursues his notion of education, perhaps the superintendent of schools can find time to enforce building maintenance codes, retrain police officers in enforcement of written laws leaving dispute resolution to social workers, uncomplicate the connect/disconnect of utilities, fix potholes, and the myriad other existing ordinances that have too long been neglected and ignored.
But don't count on it.
Sam Forrest. Richmond.
Let Developers Pay For New Ballpark
Editor, Times-Dispatch:
I write to commend the views from Church Hill residents Randolph Bell and Jean Wight in the Dec. 28 Commentary section, "Ballpark Would Dig a Financial Hole In Shockoe Bottom."I am not a passionate baseball fan -- I watch the World Series, but have not seen a Richmond Braves game. I live in Henrico and do not (intentionally) pay taxes to Richmond; so I don't have a dog in this fight. But over the past couple of years I have followed the controversy about a replacement for The Diamond and have read most of the commentary for and against the several proposals.
Church Hill resident homeowners Bell and Wight have written the most logical and compelling argument I have read on either side. I would urge Mayor Dwight Jones and members of City Council to read their argument and follow their summary recommendation, i.e., if a new ball park is to be built let the interested developers purchase the land, finance its construction, and pay for its operating costs, including taxes to the city.
I hold no brief as to location but Bell and Wight certainly make a good argument that it not be in the Bottom.
Daniel A. Polk. Henrico.
Is it Global Warming -- Or Simply Sun Spots?
Editor, Times-Dispatch:
President Franklin D. Roosevelt once said: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Global warming is the greatest hoax this country has ever seen and it amazes me as to the multitude of our citizens that have bought into this madness.This is systematically done through the process of inducing fear into the minds of many gullible people in the country -- which has been done by some prominent people in Congress. They keep pushing billions of our tax dollars to support this hoax. They will eventually destroy our economy over something that isn't real.
Fact: People have absolutely no power to control the Earth's climate. Granted, we have some control on the quality of air we breathe, but that's about it.
Here's another fact: The sun controls the Earth's climate. This involves variations in activities of sun spots and solar flares. The more sunspots, the warmer the climate grows. Fewer sunspots means the climate is cooler.
This is basic climatology that is taught in elementary and high schools. It has been verified by the most respected climatologists in the world. If one still believes the Earth is constantly warming and everything is going to shrivel up and die unless we do something -- just be patient. In a few decades the coming ice age will be the new hoax.
This is a cyclical process, not something that man created. Wake up, Americans. Our economy depends on it.
Gary Allen. Colonial Heights.
Reader Reactions
I’m so sorry, DSWX, I didn’t realize disagreement was insulting. I know my master’s degree isn’t up to your lofty standards, but I did read a few things you perhaps missed…...
Unprecedented snow in Las Vegas has some scratching their heads – how can there be global warming with this unusual cold and snowy weather?
CNN Meteorologist Chad Myers had never bought into the notion that man can alter the climate and the Vegas snowstorm didn’t impact his opinion. Myers, an American Meteorological Society certified meteorologist, explained on CNN’s Dec. 18 “Lou Dobbs Tonight” that the whole idea is arrogant and mankind was in danger of dying from other natural events more so than global warming.
“You know, to think that we could affect weather all that much is pretty arrogant,” Myers said. “Mother Nature is so big, the world is so big, the oceans are so big – I think we’re going to die from a lack of fresh water or we’re going to die from ocean acidification before we die from global warming, for sure.”
Myers is the second CNN meteorologist to challenge the global warming conventions common in the media. He also said trying to determine patterns occurring in the climate would be difficult based on such a short span.
“But this is like, you know you said – in your career – my career has been 22 years long,” Myers said. “That’s a good career in TV, but talking about climate – it’s like having a car for three days and saying, ‘This is a great car.’ Well, yeah – it was for three days, but maybe in days five, six and seven it won’t be so good. And that’s what we’re doing here.”
“We have 100 years worth of data, not millions of years that the world’s been around,” Myers continued.
Dr. Jay Lehr, an expert on environmental policy, told “Lou Dobbs Tonight” viewers you can detect subtle patterns over recorded history, but that dates back to the 13th Century.
“If we go back really, in recorded human history, in the 13th Century, we were probably 7 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than we are now and it was a very prosperous time for mankind,” Lehr said. “If go back to the Revolutionary War 300 years ago, it was very, very cold. We’ve been warming out of that cold spell from the Revolutionary War period and now we’re back into a cooling cycle.”
Lehr suggested the earth is presently entering a cooling cycle – a result of nature, not man.
“The last 10 years have been quite cool,” Lehr continued. “And right now, I think we’re going into cooling rather than warming and that should be a much greater concern for humankind. But, all we can do is adapt. It is the sun that does it, not man.”
Lehr is a senior fellow and science director of The Heartland Institute, an organization that will be holding the 2009 International Conference on Climate Change in New York March 8-10.
Another CNN meteorologist attacked the concept that man is somehow responsible for changes in climate last year. Rob Marciano charged Al Gore’s 2006 movie, “An Inconvenient Truth,” had some inaccuracies.
“There are definitely some inaccuracies,” Marciano said during the Oct. 4, 2007 broadcast of CNN’s “American Morning.” “The biggest thing I have a problem with is this implication that Katrina was caused by global warming.”
The first, on May 21, headed “Climate change threat to Alpine ski resorts” , reported that the entire Alpine “winter sports industry” could soon “grind to a halt for lack of snow”. The second, on December 19, headed “The Alps have best snow conditions in a generation” , reported that this winter’s Alpine snowfalls “look set to beat all records by New Year’s Day”.
I KNOW THOSE FOLKS ARE STUPID AND INSULTING - AFTER ALL THEY DIDAGREE WITH YOU.
But DID YOU READ…..... Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change
“Global warming” is not a global crisis
Only 115 attending climatologist/scientists from all over the world endorsed this paper, which you might want to read, just to test YOUR theories…..after all, 608 additional scientists and climatologists who were NOT in attendance signed on too….I guess they are personally insulting you by disagreeing.
OR WHAT ABOUT…...Update: U. S. Senate Minority Report: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims - Scientists Continue to Debunk “Consensus” in 2008 - Released: December 11, 2008 –
I’m sure these 650 Phd’s are too ignorant to know they insulted you by disagreeing.
FRESHMEN IN COLLEGE LEARN TO USE THR SCIENTIFIC METHOD…..I guess you’re too far beyond that to remembr how.
Personally, I don’t take your personal attacks personally…..I know true ignorance when I see it.
Hey dswx get in touch with me when you can. We need to work hard to make sure these uneducated haters don’t dominate the media. Lets submit as many intelligent editorials as we can—they’d have to run them eventually right?
Your personal insults are inexcusable. Read the peer-reviewed science by actual *climate* scientists. The science is unequivocal.
Every major scientific institute dealing with climate, ocean, and the
atmosphere agrees that the evidence says since the 1970s that the
climate is warming rapidly and the primary cause is human CO2. That
scientific debate is long over. Those institutes include the
Australian Academy of Sciences, Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for
Sciences and the Arts, Brazilian Academy of Sciences, Royal Society of
Canada, Caribbean Academy of Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
French Academy of Sciences, German Academy of Natural Scientists
Leopoldina, Indian National Science Academy, Indonesian Academy of
Sciences, Royal Irish Academy, Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Italy),
Academy of Sciences Malaysia, Academy Council of the Royal Society of
New Zealand, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, and Royal Society
(UK), NASA, NOAA, the EPA, the American Geophysical Union, NCAR, the
American Meteorological Society, the Canadian Meteorological and
Oceanographic Society, and the National Academy of Sciences.
And come back when you have an advanced degree in climate science you have a clue what you are talking about. We are talking about scientific facts, not political diatribes or very immature personal attacks.
NOTE TO DSWX:
Who appointed you expert? Your letter is offensive, ill informed, and typical of liberal thought. You state, “every major professional climate science organization agrees…..“. If the only news you get comes from CBS,NBC,ABC,CNN then you haven’t noticed there are many climate change organizations that disagree, and, importantly, they have scientific tests done by real, trained, actual climate scientists; and their results, in contrast to the AlGore “finger-to-the-wind” science, clearly proves we are, in fact in a cooling stage - never mind we are all freezing to death this year. Your comment is offensive because you deride anyone’s comment that disagrees with yours and you tell the TD they must “stop”. REALLY! WHY? Because, as all good liberals think their opinion is the only opinion and there can be NO disagreement (first to talk about freedom of speech and of the press until somebody doesn’t agree with them), nobody has the right to publish or talk in public about the other viewpoint…..thus, the Democrats’ push to enact the “fairness doctrine” to try to destroy talk radio. Since Liberal talk radio (read that Al “the election thief” Franken) failed so miserably - NOBODY listened, even in Liberal heaven, New York City - the only answer is to try to legislate and outlaw the other opinion. Kind of flys in the face of freedom of speech, but then, Pravda WAS a news organization, just like CBS,NBC,ABC,CNN. To call you an obtuse conceited idiot would be a compliment - so please crawl back in your warm hole and keep your opinion to yourself so intelligent people can live in the real, COLD world.
This issue is not as simple as “either-or” reasoning. Scientists hypothesize that the Earth’s climate has changed many times over the eons; without man’s influence. That seems to be the bottom line. Chances are good that it will happen again. It is postulated that a mini-ice age occured as recently as the 1500’s. No seemingly excessive levels of man-made greenhouse gases then, but who really knows what is excessive for our planet.
So, the Earth does it’s own thing whether we drive SUVs or not. Do we influence the amount and rate of climate change? It’s just intuitively reasonable to say YES. SUVs are not a naturally occuring part of the planet. Man makes them and they, in addition to many other man made sources, spew stuff into the environment that changes the balance of chemicals in the atmosphere. That effects man’s life. So, Man effects his own life. News Flash! What can we do to effect our lives differently? Lots of stuff, but that doesn’t mean we won’t have catastrophic climate change over time. It does mean that we might be able to live healthier lives while we are on the planet and that’s a good thing, yes? So, what’s wrong with taking measures to help ourselves live healthier lives in the present; i.e. using non-fossil fuels, etc. . . . . .?
If the science is settled then why are more and more scientists being counted as skeptics? And why are more and more media stories backpedaling on the whole thing? Thirty odd years ago it was “we’re heading for another ice age”, then it was we’re heating the planet, then it was discovered that the planet was actually cooling and they stopped calling it “global warming” and started calling it “climate change.“ It would seem that those that would have us believe in AGW can’t seem to make up their minds as to what they want to call their theory and are desperate to cover their own butts so that they can continue to receive funding. They are destroying what little credibility they had.
As former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynahan once said, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts”. The Times Dispatch continues to print disingenuous, anti-science and anti-intellectual letters regarding global warming. Yet the facts behind global warming are unequivocal. Every major professional climate science organization in the world agrees. Since the 1970s, man-made greenhouse gases have warmed the planet at a faster rate than would have occurred if only natural forces were at play. The science has been extensively debated and peer-reviewed (one of the cornerstones of all science) through scientific journals and conference. The scientific debate is long over. What is left is what actions to take to deal with it, which is outside the realm of science. Yet the Times Dispatch continues to publish letters that spread gross disinformation (“global warming is a hoax”) and which are not in the least factual? Why? Stop it. Right now. We live in the 21st century, not the Middle Ages. The science is strong. In fact, it is much stronger than many other areas of science which are taken as absolutes. Cosmic rays, solar variation and volcanoes do not explain the warming over the past 30+ years. And short-term, year-to-year or even decadel variations in global warming are weather, not climate.
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement